EMET vs. GNR
EMET (VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF) and GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds - EMET tracks the MVIS Global Clean-Tech Metals Index while GNR tracks the S&P Global Natural Resources Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMET returned 21.61%/yr vs 15.55%/yr for GNR. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMET charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GNR.
Performance
EMET vs. GNR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMET achieves a 24.96% return, which is significantly higher than GNR's 20.27% return.
EMET
- 1D
- -3.09%
- 1M
- 10.55%
- YTD
- 24.96%
- 6M
- 36.66%
- 1Y
- 116.88%
- 3Y*
- 21.61%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GNR
- 1D
- -0.53%
- 1M
- 1.20%
- YTD
- 20.27%
- 6M
- 23.12%
- 1Y
- 43.10%
- 3Y*
- 15.55%
- 5Y*
- 9.73%
- 10Y*
- 10.91%
EMET vs. GNR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMET VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF | 24.96% | 81.22% | -12.81% | -12.28% | -17.15% | -0.14% |
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF | 20.27% | 28.68% | -8.27% | 2.95% | 10.20% | 1.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMET and GNR is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2021 | 0.79 |
The correlation between EMET and GNR shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (1 year) to 0.79 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
EMET vs. GNR — Risk / Return Rank
EMET
GNR
EMET vs. GNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF (EMET) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| EMET | GNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.46 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.60 | 5.43 | -0.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.70 | 21.28 | -5.58 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EMET | GNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.27 | 2.64 | +0.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.50 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 0.26 | -0.01 |
Drawdowns
EMET vs. GNR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMET drawdown since its inception was -53.05%, roughly equal to the maximum GNR drawdown of -51.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMET and GNR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMET | GNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.05% | -51.37% | -1.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.58% | -7.97% | -17.61% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -40.50% | -21.15% | -19.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -48.59% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.29% | -1.51% | -3.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.83% | -14.95% | -9.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.47% | 2.03% | +5.44% |
Volatility
EMET vs. GNR - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF (EMET) has a higher volatility of 12.59% compared to SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) at 4.53%. This indicates that EMET's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMET | GNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.59% | 4.53% | +8.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 30.81% | 13.23% | +17.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 35.96% | 16.39% | +19.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 32.96% | 20.23% | +12.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.96% | 21.88% | +11.08% |
EMET vs. GNR - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMET has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than GNR's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMET vs. GNR - Dividend Comparison
EMET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than GNR's 2.47% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMET VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF | 1.47% | 1.84% | 1.89% | 2.02% | 2.56% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF | 2.47% | 2.76% | 4.73% | 3.37% | 4.37% | 3.44% | 2.78% | 3.84% | 3.51% | 2.40% | 2.06% | 4.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMET and GNR have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMET has higher volatility (12.59%) compared to GNR (4.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMET dropped -53.05% vs GNR's -51.37%.
On 3-year performance, EMET leads with 21.61% vs 15.55% for GNR. On fees, GNR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, GNR has been the lower-risk option at 4.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, EMET has performed better with a 21.61% return vs 15.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GNR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMET.
GNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 1.47% for EMET.
EMET tracks MVIS Global Clean-Tech Metals Index, while GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for EMET and 0.40% for GNR.
EMET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.27 vs 2.64), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for EMET and GNR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer